Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Nature and anti-art

Re: Nature and anti-art
December 20, 2013, 05:59:07 PM
I suspected, but I could never understand the golden ratio.

Re: Nature and anti-art
December 21, 2013, 02:42:08 AM
Make something clear for me dead last: How much of those photographs is computer generated? The colors, the shapes, how much?

And what about the chart with the shell and the triangle below the green fractal vegetable: How can I learn more about it?

You say you're an occultist, can you recommend me some books on the occult, esoteric and about patterns of nature and mathematics???

1. All of the Hubble telescope pictures are computer generated, since, well, they come from an orbital telescope. Probably enhanced afterward, sharpened or cleaned up so starlight doesn't fuzz out the images of the galaxies, but I don't know that to be factual. Just a guess.

2. The nautilus shell indeed reflects the Golden Ratio, which is a series of rectangles (or a spiral drawn through rectangles) that are generated through the Fibonacci sequence. Here's a really solid introduction to the Golden Ratio/Fibonacci numbers I found when I was looking for that image a few days ago.

http://www.maths.surrey.ac.uk/hosted-sites/R.Knott/Fibonacci/fibnat.html

3. The best introduction to the secret (occult) meaning of numbers and shapes that I've found is in this book.

http://www.amazon.com/Beginners-Guide-Constructing-Universe-Mathematical/dp/0060926716/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1387592656&sr=1-1&keywords=beginner%27s+guide+to+constructing+the+universe

The author touches briefly on many, many occult concepts but does not present them in a traditional occultists' context. So knowing nothing about that stuff, you will still understand everything. My only warning is that there are so many relationships between shapes, numbers, mythology, psychology, history, and science presented in the book, that you would really only get the most out of it if you are good at researching things yourself. Else, you might end up frustrated that the author does not delve very deeply into these very profound topics.

If you want to learn more about occultism in general, I don't really have anywhere to point you because I've found such a load of garbage books and website on the subject, I hesitate to recommend anything out of caution. I will not spread false information; there is too much of that already. My only knowledge of occultism comes from finding things like that book mentioned above, researching independently, drawing parallels and conclusions on my own from synthesizing the various subjects that are in agreement in the different resources I find.

Crowley's books are a pretty decent introduction; "The Book of the Law" might pry your mind open enough to start absorbing some of the occult nonsense, same with his "Book of Lies" (which is partially gibberish and partially genius; it is a great book to buy early because you can return to it over and over, and continue to discover more and more). Liber 777 is stuffed full of mnemonic devices and meanings but they are not something that someone unfamiliar with such things could pick up and understand right away.

The proto-Jewish Kabbalah is used a lot in occultism, and I've found it a great tool for putting into perspective the myriad mechanical truths that will be uncovered when you start studying. Think of it as an aperture for hanging and organizing the mental machines and tools you will build, or a shelf for holding the books that you collect. Here is the best book I've found on the subject.

http://www.amazon.com/Kabbalah-Modern-World-Migene-Gonz%C3%A1lez-Wippler/dp/0738709875/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1387593257&sr=1-1&keywords=kabbalah+for+the+modern+world

And then, last but not least, there is a great online resource for getting a glimpse of exactly what you are getting yourself into if you want to take this kind of thing seriously.

www.09a.org

Download and read the introductory texts (since they are all available as .pdf files). You will no doubt be alarmed at the tasks that they suggest you undertake. Probably, they are not all necessary for becoming a legitimate, certified occultist. But, they are good reading anyway.

Re: Nature and anti-art
December 22, 2013, 10:02:52 AM
Thanks a lot. You're a cool guy, dead last. Are you fat?

The book you pointed me too may be one that I was looking for. I put a presentation on youtube on my bookmark about this subject, taken from a book, and with the link for the book, about how everything is created with these forms. Then I lost it. I don't know if it was the same book, but it sure looks like it. This is just what I was looking for. I need to have this books, it complements all that I've read so far.

I'm into the occult, when I say into, sadly, I read it but not dilligently. I plan to study it seriously now, in fact, I already started.

I can offer you material too. What's your e-mail? Or I can post it all here.


Re: Nature and anti-art
December 22, 2013, 03:57:46 PM
Yes, I'm intolerably fat.

Please share any material you have to suggest, I'll look for it here (or you can PM me, since this thread is less about occultism as about natural forms [though the two subjects are closely related]).

Re: Nature and anti-art
December 24, 2013, 08:44:50 AM
Starting to browse O9A...
On the surface it seems something I would like to know and follow, just to at least help myself to bring more structure and discipline to my movement towards goals and my mental development.
I hope there is more substance to it than the mere gibberish outsiders tend to think these philosophical currents have.

Re: Nature and anti-art
December 24, 2013, 02:41:47 PM
Yes, I'm intolerably fat.


How do you manage to tolerate the intolerable? That's the sort of useful shit people like to know.

Re: Nature and anti-art
December 25, 2013, 02:48:11 AM
Starting to browse O9A...
On the surface it seems something I would like to know and follow, just to at least help myself to bring more structure and discipline to my movement towards goals and my mental development.
I hope there is more substance to it than the mere gibberish outsiders tend to think these philosophical currents have.

That's precisely what it is there for.

Is there substance there? Think about the word, "sub-stance". Something on which you can stand. Do you want to stand there? Then stand there. See what is beneath you. (Now, that's some gibberish.)


How do you manage to tolerate the intolerable? That's the sort of useful shit people like to know.


I'm not actually fat; good catch. Though, now I'm exposed as a liar, so take what you will.

Re: Nature and anti-art
December 26, 2013, 01:56:05 AM
The pentagram symbolises the golden ratio. The different side lengths are in such a proportion.

This can be demonstrated much like proving Pythagoras' theorem. Observing common angle sizes and forming a ratio-based equation on the sides.

Re: Nature and anti-art
January 02, 2014, 05:26:11 AM
Nature superbly crafts lifeforms and non-lifeforms which are elegant, functional, mysterious, and beautiful.  Is it the functional and mysterious qualities which makes these anti-art?

Re: Nature and anti-art
January 02, 2014, 11:34:03 PM
Nature superbly crafts lifeforms and non-lifeforms which are elegant, functional, mysterious, and beautiful.  Is it the functional and mysterious qualities which makes these anti-art?

I would say yes.

I would also say that the term I chose to describe these forms, "anti-art", is a poorly fitting term. The term was chosen to emphasize the distinction between the art forms that come from the human mind and the forms that occur without the human mind; natural, necessary, mechanical, functional, superb, perfect, and certainly mysterious.

I would (also) also say that it means little to draw distinctions like I have done, because the human mind is as much a part of the universal mechanics as those "anti-art" forms themselves. But that is my way; sometimes I lend myself to oxymoronic and absurd comparisons to illuminate the real lack of separation between forms, without really meaning to. Sometimes I get it backward. Using double-reverse psychology on oneself is a useful way of figuring out where one stands, sometimes. The unconscious is more powerful than I want it to be.

Maybe (and here we go again) I could call these naturally occurring forms "para-art" or "meta-art" and conclude that the art-stuff we create as humans is a sub-level of these forms. But then I'm still drawing unnecessary distinctions. Distinctions between forms and objects really only go as deep as we want them to (and are non-existent when we stop trying so hard to distinguish them). The will is a mighty thing. Life is a battle between the will and the unconscious. Choose your side carefully (or not)!